Economic Calculation: Private Property or Several Control?

Abstract

As the centenary of the 1917 Russian revolution approaches, it is worth reviewing the past 100 years’ discussion amongst economists on the possibility—or otherwise—of economic planning under socialism. The socialist calculation debate is of fundamental importance, not merely as a specialist application of economic ideas, but as an investigation of the foundations of economic activity. Every economic action is premised upon calculation, every choice depends upon an assessment of the costs and benefits of each alternative between which the agent must choose. The view of that choice and its attendant calculation is constitutive of the schools of thought—Marxian, neoclassical and Austrian—which have contributed to the debate. An understanding of the calculation debate is therefore required to understand how these paradigms stand in relation to each other. This article addresses one aspect of that debate—the claim by Austrian economists that socialism is impossible because the absence of private property in the means of production precludes economic calculation. The article suggests that several control rather than private property is required for economic calculation, and that several control is consistent with public ownership of the means of production. The Austrian argument on this point, therefore, is without force.     

Organizational versus Market Knowledge: From Concrete Embodiment to Abstract Representation

Synopsis In contrast to the neoclassical economic presumption in favor of markets, we argue that organizations, not markets should be taken as our default assumption. We do so on information processing grounds. We distinguish between Zen and market Knowledge. The first is embodied and hard to articulate and the second abstract-symbolic. In human evolution, the first type of knowledge came first, and, on any pragmatic definition of knowledge, it still incorporates most of what we mean by the term. We take codification and abstraction as the two data processing activities that lead to the articulation of knowledge into an abstract-symbolic form. We develop a conceptual framework, the Information-Space (I-Space) to show how far the articulation of knowledge leads to its being shared. Whereas an unlimited sharing of information and knowledge leads to market-oriented outcomes, a more limited sharing leads to organizational outcomes. A market-oriented economics has tended to look to physics for its models; the field of organization theory has tended to look to biology. A more organization-oriented economics would thus look more to biology for its models.     

Reopening the convergence debate: A new look at cross-country growth empirics

There are two sources of inconsistency in existing cross-country empirical work on growth: correlated individual effects and endogenous explanatory variables. We estimate a variety of cross-country growth regressions using a generalized method of moments estimator that eliminates both problems. In one application, we find that per capita incomes converge to their steady-state levels at a rate of approximately 10 percent per year. This result stands in sharp contrast to the current consensus, which places the convergence rate at 2 percent. We discuss the theoretical implications of this finding. In another application, we perform a test of the Solow model. Again, contrary to prior reults, we reject both the standard and the augmented version of the model.     

Varieties of paternalism and the heterogeneity of utility structures

A principal source of interest in behavioral economics has been its advertised contributions to policies aimed at ‘nudging’ people away from allegedly natural but self-defeating behavior toward patterns of response thought more likely to improve their welfare. This has occasioned controversies among economists and philosophers around the normative limits of paternalism, especially by technical policy advisors. One recent suggestion has been that ‘boosting,’ in which interventions aim to enhance people’s general cognitive skills and representational repertoires instead of manipulating their choice environments behind their backs, avoids the main normative challenges. A limitation in most of this literature is that it has focused on relatively sweeping policy recommendations and consequently on strong polar alternatives of general paternalism and strict laissez faire. We review a real instance, drawn from a consulting project we conducted for an investment bank, of a proposed intervention that is more typical of the kind that economists are more often actually called upon to offer. In this example, the sophistication of current tools for preference attribution, combined with philosophical externalism about the semantics of preferences that makes it less plausible to attribute their literal self-conscious representation to people as propositional attitude content becomes more tightly refined, blocks applicability of the distinction between nudging and boosting. This seems to call for irreducible, context-specific ethical judgment in assessing the appropriateness of the forms of paternalism that economists must actually wrestle with in going about their everyday business.     

论中国特色社会主义经济学的核心范畴

确立中国特色社会主义经济学的逻辑起点，必须突出它的特殊性，而不能照搬以往的经济学。迄今，所有的经济学由于其任务和宗旨不同大体可分四种类型、四个逻辑起点。中国特色社会主义经济学根据它的任务和宗旨，需要在科学社会主义实践逻辑的基础上，进行科学抽象，分析其矛盾特殊性的三个表现及中国的个性，揭示以社会主义本质为核。范畴和逻辑起点的理论规定性，进而全面展开，创立新的架构。     

集群中小企业发展的关键

在激烈的市场竞争中，单个中小企业在经营中困难重重。集群这种企业间组织新形式，可以发挥我国众多中小企业的优势，在不牺牲经营柔性的前提下，实现规模经济，降低经营成本。     

Would I lie to you? On social preferences and lying aversion

This paper reinterprets the evidence on lying or deception presented in Gneezy (Am. Econ. Rev. 95(1):384–394, 2005). We show that Gneezy’s data are consistent with the simple hypothesis that people are one of two kinds: either a person will never lie, or a person will lie whenever she prefers the outcome obtained by lying over the outcome obtained by telling the truth. This implies that so long as lying induces a preferred outcome over truth-telling, a person’s decision of whether to lie may be completely insensitive to other changes in the induced outcomes, such as exactly how much she monetarily gains relative to how much she hurts an anonymous partner. We run new but broadly similar experiments to those of Gneezy in order to test this hypothesis. While we also confirm that there is an aversion to lying in our subject population, our data cannot reject the simple hypothesis described above either.

---

Electronic Supplementary Material  The online version of this article () contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.      

Interest and profit

This paper argues that it is important to distinguish between the real rate of interest on money and the profitability of business enterprise. The former is a purely financial or monetary phenomenon （as claimed by Keynes） and the latter is in the nature of a surplus over and above the costs of production, including financing costs. There is an inverse relationship between the real rate of interest on money and the average mark-up or profit share. A synthetic theory of profit illustrates these points.     

Prediction of the next hypercalcemia free period: application of random effect models with selection on first event

The length of repeated hypercalcemia free periods of patients with bone metastasis of breast cancer with at least one hypercalcemic event was modelled according to a generalized linear mixed model formulated in terms of transition probabilities and according to a latent variable model. In the former case the periods were assumed to be lognormally distributed with two variance components (patients and residue). In the latter case the conditional intensity given a patient was assumed to be the intensity of the Weibull distribution, while the random patient effect (frailty) was assumed to be drawn from a gamma distribution. In both cases the selection of only patients with at least one hypercalcemic event was taken into consideration. In both models the variance of the patient effect turned out to be negligible. For the second and later periods the Weibull appeared to fit better than the lognormal model. For the first period there was almost no information available.     

企业的制度需求分析

首先对制度的内涵进行了界定，并分别从古典经济学、新制度经济学、哈耶克的社会演化理论、博弈论和演化经济学的角度对制度需求进行了经济学分析。其次从实证入手，分析了企业在何时以及为什么会遇到制度的瓶颈制约。最后从管理学角度，分析了制度对企业员工具有保障和激励作用，对企业系统具有减少混乱度、降低管理成本等作用。